The single-judge High Court dismissed an appeal by claimants seeking further enhancement of compensation for superstructures on land acquired by the State of Punjab under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in the absence of the appellants.
Appeal dismissed in default as no one appeared for the appellants; no enhancement of compensation granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
RFA No. 2439 of 1992 (O&M)
Garib Dass and another ..... Appellants vs State of Punjab and another ..... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: None for the appellants.
Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The claimants have filed the present appeal seeking further enhancement of compensation for the superstructures existing on the acquired land.
Briefly, the facts are that vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Punjab acquired land along with structures existing thereon situated in village Alipur Arian, Tehsil and District Patiala, for public purpose. The Land Acquisition Collector determined the market value of the superstructure at 5,350/- vide his award dated 18.3.1983. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the claimants filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the value of the superstructure at 8,050/- i.e. 50% increase was granted on the award of the Collector. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal.
None has appeared for the appellants.
A perusal of the impugned award shows that the appellants have not produced any convincing evidence with regard to constructed area or the amount spent thereon. Inspite of that the learned court below has granted 50% increase on the amount granted by the Collector, which prima facie, calls for no enhancement. However, as no one has appeared for the appellants, the present appeal is dismissed in default.
(Rajesh Bindal) Judge
20.8.2010 vs.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the award determining compensation for superstructures on acquired land calls for enhancement.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Garib Dass
State of Punjab
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
